Honestly who cares, let's just see how much faster this 680 is and how high priced it will be... Knowing Nvidia they will try and rip off the consumer some more...

Click to expand...

There is ALWAYS a premium for those who want the latest and greatest. That's business. If you can wait a few months prices come down, there's more variations from vendors. At 1920 most games look great with last years top cards. It costs billions to develop this tech and GPUs have been advancing WAY faster than CPUs. I want virtual reality games!!! maybe 10 years off?? One day games won't be on on some pitiful screen but we'll be in it.

sorry pal
from JPR February 28, 2012:
As usual, it was a two horse race between AMD and Nvidia. The latter saw graphics cards shipments increase by 3.7% from Q3 2011 to 63.4% while AMD-based boards decreased 3.6% to 36.3% for the same period. On a year-to-year basis AMD lost market share by 2.7% while Nvidia gained 2.9%.

According to the latest market share data from Jon Peddie Research, folks in AMD’s graphics division have a good reason to pop open the champers over the weekend. AMD ended Q4 2011 with a 24.8 percent market share, growing 7.8 percent sequentially over Q3. On the other hand, Nvidia’s share dipped by 3.1 percent, from 16.1 percent to 15.7 sequentially. Intel’s growth also came to a halt. Chipzilla dropped from 60.4 to 59.1 percent.

Looking at the year-on-year figures, the result is even better for AMD. In Q4 of 2010 AMD commanded a 24.2 percent share, while Nvidia was in a close second with 22.5 percent. Now AMD is in a comfortable lead, shipping 58 percent more GPUs than Nvidia. Nvidia also lost share to Intel, as Intel had an overall share of 52.5 percent in Q4 10, and now it is at 59.1 percent.

Yep, and AMD's graphics market share is just going to increase. While I have no doubts that the GTX 680 is going to be an awesome card (it really is), I've heard nothing about the rest of the lineup. Market share isn't dictated by a single $500+ card. Nvidia needs an entire new lineup. It's OEM's and the "non-enthusiast" consumer that makes up a bulk of the market share.

Yep, and AMD's graphics market share is just going to increase. While I have no doubts that the GTX 680 is going to be an awesome card (it really is), I've heard nothing about the rest of the lineup. Market share isn't dictated by a single $500+ card. Nvidia needs an entire new lineup. It's OEM's and the "non-enthusiast" consumer that makes up a bulk of the market share.

I think it's a GOOD sign. Don't we, as consumers, need AMD and nVidia to be as closely tied for marketshare as possible? Isn't that a better market situation than what we are seeing in the CPU market with Intel wiping the floor with AMD?

They're not, but they're GPUs all the same, and likely the console makers have gone for the one whose price/performance was the most attractive at the level of performance they are looking for. The fact that AMD won seems to indicate that AMD is doing things right. Which is good, given that AMD is a bit the underdog in the GPU market.

Isn't that a better market situation than what we are seeing in the CPU market with Intel wiping the floor with AMD?

Click to expand...

That market condiditon is exactly what the consumer wants..real competition. Unfortunately, if this "104" kepler lives up to the hype, and is much faster than AMD's cards(the proverbial up to 40%), and is priced higher than AMD cards, that's not exactly competition....where as with Intel AMD, Intels give more for the same dollar when buying a CPU(boards are another matter).

The fact that AMD won seems to indicate that AMD is doing things right. Which is good, given that AMD is a bit the underdog in the GPU market.

Click to expand...

"Right" could mean jsut doing what the console makers want, rather than what the GPU provider wants to provide. Giving a design to a console maker may actually be cheaper in the end, if it's customized to the consoler maker's needs, even if the individual GPU price is higher.

It doesn't even really indicate anything about AMD or nVidia consumer GPU designs, as far as I am concerned.

That market condiditon is exactly what the consumer wants..real competition. Unfortunately, if this "104" kepler lives up to the hype, and is much faster than AMD's cards(the proverbial up to 40%), and is priced higher than AMD cards, that's not exactly competition....where as with Intel AMD, Intels give more for the same dollar when buying a CPU(boards are another matter).

"Right" could mean jsut doing what the console makers want, rather than what the GPU provider wants to provide. Giving a design to a console maker may actually be cheaper in the end, if it's customized to the consoler maker's needs, even if the individual GPU price is higher.

It doesn't even really indicate anything about AMD or nVidia consumer GPU designs, as far as I am concerned.

Click to expand...

Games sell GPU's. If consoles are going AMD then Nvidias TWIMTBP will not matter in the least anymore as the core game will be naturalized for the AMD architecture. Is AMD better? No, I'm willing to bet just cheaper. However this means a natural shift in development to AMDs favor.

Yeah the console market isn't the discreet GPU market. However the way gaming is today its port based.....ported from now a dominant AMD market. NVIDIA is at a natural disadvantage now because of this. Like I said, games sell GPU's. Games now will come from an AMD market. Bad news for NVIDIA. Its the BIG picture you guys gotta look at. Not cherry picked stats.

I don't think that porting console titles that run on AMD-designed ahrdware would be any sort of issue for nV. They are a programming powerhouse, and even AMD has admitted that their current design more closely resembles nVidia's design.

I don't doubt that it may make things more difficult for nVidia, but I don't doubt they are more than capable of turning that into a positive for them, too.

I don't think that porting console titles that run on AMD-designed ahrdware would be any sort of issue for nV. They are a programming powerhouse, and even AMD has admitted that their current design more closely resembles nVidia's design.

I don't doubt that it may make things more difficult for nVidia, but I don't doubt they are more than capable of turning that into a positive for them, too.

Yep, and AMD's graphics market share is just going to increase. While I have no doubts that the GTX 680 is going to be an awesome card (it really is), I've heard nothing about the rest of the lineup. Market share isn't dictated by a single $500+ card. Nvidia needs an entire new lineup. It's OEM's and the "non-enthusiast" consumer that makes up a bulk of the market share.

Click to expand...

Do you think its really a leap of faith, if the leaked benchmarks are to be believed, that the GTX680, which is as fast as a 7970 (give or take depending on res and games), that the rest of the lineup wouldnt match up to similar performance /watt numbers?

I mean, 190-200W TDP for a card matching the 7970 is a win, especially for Nvidia. Sure Nvidia would wipe the floor with AMD if, again, the card trades punches with 7970, if they low balled the price to $499. But like cad said below (editing FTW!), they are a FOR profit business. We WILL pay for that card.

Im honestly more interested as a fly on the wall to see the AMD price /performance to /watt crowd is going to say now? It really will come down to pricing and the games you play and how the card performs...that is... outside of those that refuse to let their wallet do the thinking.

Considering investors give money to companies based on hopes of future pay out, i see that as a very small concern.

Of course, nvidia has been downgraded recently in the past several months, so they've already dealt with the fallout from that. You can rest assurred that anything nV can do right now to increase investor confidence is exactly where they are headed...and if this really is a mid-range GPU, sold for top-range dollar, investors are going to give them a standing ovation.

Considering investors give money to companies based on hopes of future pay out, i see that as a very small concern.

Of course, nvidia has been downgraded recently in the past several months, so they've already dealt with the fallout from that. You can rest assurred that anything nV can do right now to increase investor confidence is exactly where they are headed...and if this really is a mid-range GPU, sold for top-range dollar, investors are going to give them a standing ovation.

Considering investors give money to companies based on hopes of future pay out, i see that as a very small concern.

Of course, nvidia has been downgraded recently in the past several months, so they've already dealt with the fallout from that. You can rest assurred that anything nV can do right now to increase investor confidence is exactly where they are headed...and if this really is a mid-range GPU, sold for top-range dollar, investors are going to give them a standing ovation.

Click to expand...

The downgrade was from a few things. The market share loss and the loss of the console market I suspect. Kepler seems more like a hail mary at this point then a standing ovation.

Kepler seems more like a hail mary at this point then a standing ovation.

Click to expand...

It very well could be, but since we know that NV has the "100" or "110" GPU as backup, I am pretty confident this new card is going to be decent at least(with the GTX680 naming)...and again, selling for top dollar. I guess reviews will tell all.

Fudzilla? Really? LOL! The facts are in discrete , because earlier you were claiming AND posting a graph to show nvidia lost discrete share. UNTRUE! Nvidia doesn't make integrated graphics at the moment, a market which Intel owns. Nvidia has billions in cash, no debt, and twice the market cap of ALL of AMD and makes 10x the profit of AMD's discrete division. Nvidia owns the highly profitable professional market at over 80%.
AMD still has a ton of debt, has lost many key employees, and struggles to make a profit.
Of course if you include integrated as the Fudzilla article does Intel is number one by a wide margin, AMD two, Nvidia three. That is not what your earlier post referred to. Dismal sophistry.

Judging by who is making profit, NVIDIA has nothing to worry about. Where as AMD is leaking out money from CPU division faster than GPU division can make profit. One bad generation of cards doesn't make a manufacturer sink. NVIDIA made great GPUs before GTX 4xx and 5xx was close to normal again... AMD seriously improved things after HD 2xxx.

Yep, and AMD's graphics market share is just going to increase. While I have no doubts that the GTX 680 is going to be an awesome card (it really is), I've heard nothing about the rest of the lineup. Market share isn't dictated by a single $500+ card. Nvidia needs an entire new lineup. It's OEM's and the "non-enthusiast" consumer that makes up a bulk of the market share.

Click to expand...

This is indeed the next question. GK106 is nowhere to be seen, hell we don't even know if it exists! So they must launch pretty fast three variants of the GK104, the 680 which seems to be solved, and the 670 in maybe two flavors for the HD7950 and the HD7870.

I personally never go for the top-end card, they are never the best value for your money (that is if you have it...) but the second top. If NV can deliver for the 680 an increase of 35-40% over the 580 (that's roughly what's needed to beat without a doubt the 7970) for 550$ (50$ increase above launch price of the 580) then I hope they will maintain that increase for the 670 over the 570 and launch at a similar price that the 570 was launched (350$).

That is if they really want to be competitive against AMD and not play along with price fixin' games.

This is indeed the next question. GK106 is nowhere to be seen, hell we don't even know if it exists! So they must launch pretty fast three variants of the GK104, the 680 which seems to be solved, and the 670 in maybe two flavors for the HD7950 and the HD7870.

I personally never go for the top-end card, they are never the best value for your money (that is if you have it...) but the second top. If NV can deliver for the 680 an increase of 35-40% over the 580 (that's roughly what's needed to beat without a doubt the 7970) for 550$ (50$ increase above launch price of the 580) then I hope they will maintain that increase for the 670 over the 570 and launch at a similar price that the 570 was launched (350$).

That is if they really want to be competitive against AMD and not play along with price fixin' games.

Click to expand...

45% on top of the 580? Man that would be sick!.....But I doubt it. Maybe Ill eat some crow who knows. Also I'm with you. Never do I buy a top tier card. 7970/580 have always been over priced. 7950/570 is where its at IMO.

45% on top of the 580? Man that would be sick!.....But I doubt it. Maybe Ill eat some crow who knows. Also I'm with you. Never do I buy a top tier card. 7970/580 have always been over priced. 7950/570 is where its at IMO.

Click to expand...

I usually get the +500€ card, but I also understand those who go for the best bang for buck. For example this 460 1gb soc I have will find home from friend's PC when I get new card this year. More than fine for average gamer.

Judging by who is making profit, NVIDIA has nothing to worry about. Where as AMD is leaking out money from CPU division faster than GPU division can make profit. One bad generation of cards doesn't make a manufacturer sink. NVIDIA made great GPUs before GTX 4xx and 5xx was close to normal again... AMD seriously improved things after HD 2xxx.

Somehow I get the feeling of G92 with this new GK104.

Click to expand...

I think Kepler will be a great leap forward. It looks good from the outset as opposed to 480 furnace, and get the feeling they are going to bring some real monsters to market as 28nm seems to have helped them big time in the heat and power area.

Fudzilla? Really? LOL! The facts are in discrete , because earlier you were claiming AND posting a graph to show nvidia lost discrete share. UNTRUE! Nvidia doesn't make integrated graphics at the moment, a market which Intel owns. Nvidia has billions in cash, no debt, and twice the market cap of ALL of AMD and makes 10x the profit of AMD's discrete division. Nvidia owns the highly profitable professional market at over 80%.
AMD still has a ton of debt, has lost many key employees, and struggles to make a profit.
Of course if you include integrated as the Fudzilla article does Intel is number one by a wide margin, AMD two, Nvidia three. That is not what your earlier post referred to. Dismal sophistry.